Bush Weighs Ending Role Of Lawyers' Group In Rating Judicial Nominees

WASHINGTON — President Bush's legal advisers are moving to end the American Bar Association's semiofficial role in screening new judges, administration officials say.

Already, the White House legal team has interviewed more than 50 lawyers for new judgeships and has done so without consulting the ABA. On Monday, the White House is expected to make official what has recently become apparent when Bush's counsel, Alberto Gonzales, meets with ABA President Martha Barnett.

Leaders of the 400,000-member bar association say they have not been told of a pending change.

"I've viewed it as a normal meeting for a new administration," said Barnett, of Tallahassee, Fla. "It never dawned on me that that's why they wanted to meet. . . . We've been doing this for nearly a half-century."

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Saturday, "All I can say is we are moving quickly to fill the [judicial] vacancies."

But an administration official confirmed that the change in the policy is expected.

Ninety-four federal judgeships are vacant; the federal bench has room for 862 judges.

While the political battles over judgeships have escalated in the past 20 years, the importance of the ABA's role has diminished.

Before 1952, when the lawyers' group took on the task of evaluating prospective judges, presidents relied almost entirely on the word of U.S. senators. As a result, the bench was staffed with politicians' friends and cronies.

In its screening process, the ABA stressed professional competence.

Until this year, the bar association has been given advance word on potential judges. Its special team of lawyers would then examine candidates' experience and legal writings. Judges and lawyers who have worked with the candidates also were asked about their professional reputation. The 15-member committee then rated the prospective nominee as well qualified, qualified or not qualified.

However, for several years, the ABA has been far from alone in giving advice on judicial candidates, and conservatives have come to view the bar association's assessments as biased.

Still, the prospect of the Bush administration ending the ABA's role in the selection process troubled Nan Aron, executive director of the Alliance for Justice. She said it suggests the White House will put conservative ideology ahead of professionalism in its judicial appointments.

"This looks like a pre-emptive strike to make sure only ideologically pure candidates are nominated," she said.

Conservatives, for their part, are still upset over a lukewarm ABA rating given Robert Bork when President Ronald Reagan nominated him to the Supreme Court.

Although the ABA committee gave Bork a "well-qualified" rating in 1987, five of the panel's members dissented and said Bork lacked the fairness and temperament required of a high court justice.